Bombay High Court
Union Of India Thr General ... vs Dalit Tukaram Mudkhede on 24 February, 2023
Bench: V. V. Kankanwadi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
REVIEW APPLICATION (CIVIL) NO.44 OF 2023
IN FA/1380/2018
UNION OF INDIA
THR G.M. SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAYS, SECUNDRBAD (ANDRA PRADESH)
VERSUS
PREMLABAI RAMLU RENALWAR AND THREE OTHERS
...
REVIEW APPLICATION (CIVIL) NO.45 OF 2023
IN FA/1341/2018
UNION OF INDIA
THR GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY, SECUNDERABAD
VERSUS
MOHD SABER MOHD ILLYAS
...
REVIEW APPLICATION (CIVIL) NO.46 OF 2023
IN FA/2283/2018
UNION OF INDIA
VERSUS
NAGORAO GANGARAM KAMBLE AND ANOTHER
...
REVIEW APPLICATION (CIVIL) NO.47 OF 2023
IN FA/1095/2018
UNION OF INDIA
::: Uploaded on - 24/02/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 25/02/2023 18:47:14 :::
2 RA_44_2023+3
THR GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAYS, SECUNDRABAD
VERSUS
DALIT TUKARAM MUDKHEDE
...
Mr. D.V. Soman, Advocate for applicants in all applications
Mr. P.S. Agrawal, Advocate for respondents in all applications
...
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.
RESERVED ON : 13th FEBRUARY, 2023
PRONOUNCED ON : 24th FEBRUARY, 2023
ORDER :
1 By these review applications the Union of India seeks to review
the order passed by this Court in respective First Appeals to the extent of
interest awarded. This Court while setting aside the Judgment and Award
passed by learned Railway Claims Tribunal had directed the present review
applicants to pay compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- together with interest.
2 Heard learned Advocate Mr. D.V. Soman for applicants and
learned Advocate Mr. P.S. Agrawal for respondents in all applications.
3 It has been vehemently submitted by the review applicants that
this Court erred in applying Thazhathe Purayil Sarabi and others vs. Union of
3 RA_44_2023+3
India and another [AIR 2009 SC 3098], however, that case was in respect of
interest, but mainly the compensation has been granted by following the
decision in Rathi Menon vs. Union of India and another [AIR 2001 SC 1333]
and N. Parameswaran Pillai vs. Union of India and another [AIR 2002 SC
1834]. Further, in Union of India vs. Rina Devi [AIR 2018 SC 2362] and
Union of India vs. Radha Yadav [AIR 2019 SC 1410] Hon'ble Supreme Court
has considered the liability of the Railway Authority to pay compensation. It
has been then observed that the amount of compensation payable on the date
of accident with reasonable rate of interest shall first be calculated and if the
amount so calculated is less than the amount prescribed as on the date of the
Award, then, the claimant would be entitled to higher of these two amounts.
Therefore, taking into consideration these pronouncements the respondent
would be entitled to claim only amount of Rs.8,00,000/- without any interest
and, therefore, the Judgment and order passed by this Court in respective
appeals deserves to be modified/reviewed to that extent.
4 Learned Advocate for the respondents has opposed the review
applications and submitted that there is no error apparent on the face of the
record. This Court has rightly awarded the interest. In fact, when the claim
was made, at that time, the statutory compensation was Rs.4,00,000/- and in
the meantime, that is, during the pendency of the claim before the Tribunal
4 RA_44_2023+3
the amount of statutory compensation was increased to Rs.8,00,000/-.
Under such circumstance, they were entitled to get the interest and
accordingly relying upon Thazhathe Purayil Sarabi (supra) the interest has
been awarded. Learned Advocate for the respondents also suggested that at
least on the amount of Rs.4,00,000/-, which the appellants were entitled to
from the date of untoward incident it should be granted.
5 At the outset, as regards the maintainability of review
applications is concerned, unless it is shown that there is error apparent on
the face of the record, it cannot be entertained. In State of West Bengal and
others vs. Kamal Sengupta and another [(2009) 8 SCC 612] it has been
observed that -
"The term "mistake or error apparent" by its very connotation
signifies an error which is evident per se from the record of the case
and does not require detailed examination, scrutiny and elucidation
either of the facts or the legal position."
Here, the error that has been tried to be pointed out is in view of
the pronouncements of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rina Devi (supra) and
Radha Yadav (supra). Out of them in Rina Devi (supra) cited before this
Court it was considered only for the view as to what is untoward incident.
However, Radha Yadav (supra) was not cited and it appears that this Court
5 RA_44_2023+3
lost sight of taking note of the said decision. When the legal position which
has been crystallized by Hon'ble Apex Court, then, this Court is bound to
follow the same and any order in ignorance of the said will have to be
reviewed. In Radha Yadav (supra) following are the observations :
"The issue raised in the matter does not really require any elaboration
as in our view, the judgment of this Court in the case of Rina Devi
(AIR 2018 SC 2362) is very clear. What this Court has laid down is
that the amount of compensation payable on the date of accident with
reasonable rate of interest shall first be calculated. If the amount so
calculated is less than the amount prescribed as on the date of the
award, the claimant would be entitled to higher of these two
amounts. Therefore, if the liability had arisen before the amendment
was brought in, the basic figure would be as per the Schedule as was
in existence before the amendment and on such basic figure
reasonable rate of interest would be calculated. If there be any
difference between the amount so calculated and the amount
prescribed in the Schedule as on the date of the award, the higher of
two figures would be the measure of compensation. For instance, in
case of a death in an accident which occurred before amendment, the
basic figure would be Rs.4,00,000/-. If, after applying reasonable rate
of interest, the final figure were to be less than Rs.8,00,000/-, which
was brought in by way of amendment, the claimant would be entitled
to Rs.8,00,000/-. If, however, the amount of original compensation
with rate of interest were to exceed the sum of Rs.8,00,000/- the
compensation would be in terms of figure in excess of Rs.8,00,000/-.
The idea is to afford the benefit of the amendment, to the extent
possible. Thus, according to us, the matter is crystal clear. The issue
6 RA_44_2023+3
does not need any further clarification or elaboration.
Thus, it is even explained by giving illustration then it can be
said that the point is not res integra. The interest will have to be calculated
on that basis as explained therein. In all these cases the liability to pay the
amount of compensation as against the review applicants had arisen before
the amendment was brought in and therefore, the basic figure would be as
per the Schedule, as was in existence before the amendment and on such
figure reasonable rate of interest would be calculated. Therefore, in these
cases, where there is death claim, the interest has been awarded on the
amount of Rs.4,00,000/-, which was the basic figure of compensation prior to
the amendment in the schedule. Therefore, the claimants were not entitled
to get interest on the amount which was enhanced in the schedule that had
come into force from 01.01.2017 i.e. the entire amount of Rs.8,00,000/-.
Rather calculation would show that they were entitled to get only the amount
of Rs.8,00,000/- without interest. Hence, now, the said Judgment and order
deserves to be reviewed.
6 For the aforesaid reasons, following order is passed.
ORDER
1 All the review applications stand partly allowed.
7 RA_44_2023+3
2 The Judgment and order passed by this Court in First Appeal
Nos.1380/2018, 1341/2018, 2283/2018 and 1095/2018 are reviewed.
3 The order of interest @ 6% per annum from the date of
application till the date of Award i.e. 10.07.2019 and the interest @ 9% per
annum from the date of Award till the date of actual payment of the same to
the applicants stands quashed and set aside.
4 Costs of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) stands
rejected.
5 Decree be drawn accordingly.
( Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J. )
agd
